[Prevalence Survey of Functional Dyspepsia and Irritable Bowel Syndrome in Chinese College Students Based on Rome â £ Diagnostic Criteria].

Objective: To investigate the prevalence and risk factors of functional dyspepsia (FD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) among college students in China. Methods: An online questionnaire survey of college students aged 17-35 from across China was conducted. The online questionnaire survey was supplemented by an offline survey. A total of 2025 valid samples were included for statistical analysis. χ 2 test and logistic regression were performed for statistical analysis. Results: The prevalence of FD among college students who met the Rome Ⅳ diagnostic criteria was 5.5% (112/2025), with most of them, or 66.1% (74/112), suffering from postprandial discomfort syndrome (PDS). Smoking (odds ratio [ OR]=2.334, 95% confidence interval [ CI]: 1.187-4.589, P=0.014), depression ( OR=2.447, 95% CI: 1.421-4.214, P=0.001), and insomnia ( OR=1.947, 95% CI: 1.291-2.937, P=0.001) were positively correlated with the prevalence of FD. The prevalence of IBS was 1.9% (38/2025), with IBS-diarrhea dominant (IBS-D) being the most important subtype that accounted for 44.7%. Anxiety ( OR=3.63, 95% CI: 1.34-9.88, P=0.012) and insomnia ( OR=2.35, 95% CI: 1.18-4.68, P=0.015) were positively correlated with the prevalence of IBS. Conclusion: Based on Rome Ⅳ criteria, IBS and FD are not uncommon among Chinese university students. Psychological disorders and some related lifestyle factors may be related to the development of the disease. In the future, more series of studies based on different diagnostic criteria, different regions, and multiple factors should be conducted in China.

Predictive value of alarm symptoms in Rome IV irritable bowel syndrome: A multicenter cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common functional bowel disease that shares features with many organic diseases and cannot be accurately diagnosed by symptom-based criteria. Alarm symptoms have long been applied in the clinical diagnosis of IBS. However, no study has explored the predictive value of alarm symptoms in suspected IBS patients based on the latest Rome IV criteria. AIM: To investigate the predictive value of alarm symptoms in suspected IBS patients based on the Rome IV criteria. METHODS: In this multicenter cross-sectional study, we collected data from 730 suspected IBS patients evaluated at 3 tertiary care centers from August 2018 to August 2019. Patients with IBS-like symptoms who completed colonoscopy during the study period were initially identified by investigators through medical records. Eligible patients completed questionnaires, underwent laboratory tests, and were assigned to the IBS or organic disease group according to colonoscopy findings and pathology results (if a biopsy was taken). Independent risk factors for organic disease were explored by logistic regression analysis, and the positive predictive value (PPV) and missed diagnosis rate were calculated. RESULTS: The incidence of alarm symptoms in suspected IBS patients was 75.34%. Anemia [odds ratio (OR) = 2.825, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.273-6.267, P = 0.011], fecal occult blood [OR = 1.940 (95%CI: 1.041-3.613), P = 0.037], unintended weight loss (P = 0.009), female sex [OR = 0.560 (95%CI: 0.330-0.949), P = 0.031] and marital status (P = 0.030) were independently correlated with organic disease. The prevalence of organic disease was 10.41% in suspected IBS patients. The PPV of alarm symptoms for organic disease was highest for anemia (22.92%), fecal occult blood (19.35%) and unintended weight loss (16.48%), and it was 100% when these three factors were combined. The PPV and missed diagnosis rate for diagnosing IBS were 91.67% and 74.77% when all alarm symptoms were combined with Rome IV and 92.09% and 34.10% when only fecal occult blood, unintended weight loss and anemia were combined with Rome IV, respectively. CONCLUSION: Anemia, fecal occult blood and unintended weight loss have high predictive value for organic disease in suspected IBS patients and can help identify patients requiring further examination but are not recommended as exclusion criteria for IBS.